PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CUD.TO (iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) and FCUV.TO (Fidelity U.S. Value ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds - CUD.TO tracks the S&P High Yield Dividend Aristocrats CAD Hedged Index while FCUV.TO tracks the Fidelity Canada U.S. Value Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CUD.TO returned 1.77%/yr vs 21.89%/yr for FCUV.TO. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CUD.TO charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for FCUV.TO.

Performance

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CUD.TO) and Fidelity U.S. Value ETF (FCUV.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CUD.TO achieves a 5.32% return, which is significantly lower than FCUV.TO's 15.14% return.

CUD.TO

1D
-0.28%
1M
-0.09%
YTD
5.32%
6M
1.10%
1Y
4.69%
3Y*
5.56%
5Y*
1.77%
10Y*
5.98%

FCUV.TO

1D
0.33%
1M
8.58%
YTD
15.14%
6M
12.61%
1Y
34.52%
3Y*
26.57%
5Y*
21.89%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
CUD.TO
iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		5.32%1.72%6.13%0.09%-2.31%18.87%10.36%
FCUV.TO
Fidelity U.S. Value ETF		15.14%14.80%35.81%19.98%2.58%38.55%10.80%

Correlation

The correlation between CUD.TO and FCUV.TO is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.43

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.51

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 11, 2020

0.53

The correlation between CUD.TO and FCUV.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (1 year) to 0.59 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CUD.TO
FCUV.TO

Industrials

17.3%
14.1%

Consumer Defensive

16.2%

-

Utilities

14.6%
8.5%

Financial Services

12.0%
18.8%

Technology

10.5%
27.5%

Healthcare

7.6%
3.0%

Basic Materials

6.0%
9.2%

Consumer Cyclical

5.8%
15.3%

Real Estate

4.4%

-

Energy

3.2%

-

Communication Services

2.5%
3.6%

Industrials

CUD.TO
17.3%
FCUV.TO
14.1%

Consumer Defensive

CUD.TO
16.2%
FCUV.TO

-

Utilities

CUD.TO
14.6%
FCUV.TO
8.5%

Financial Services

CUD.TO
12.0%
FCUV.TO
18.8%

Technology

CUD.TO
10.5%
FCUV.TO
27.5%

Healthcare

CUD.TO
7.6%
FCUV.TO
3.0%

Basic Materials

CUD.TO
6.0%
FCUV.TO
9.2%

Consumer Cyclical

CUD.TO
5.8%
FCUV.TO
15.3%

Real Estate

CUD.TO
4.4%
FCUV.TO

-

Energy

CUD.TO
3.2%
FCUV.TO

-

Communication Services

CUD.TO
2.5%
FCUV.TO
3.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Fidelity U.S. Value ETF

Often compared with CUD.TO:
CUD.TO vs. CDZ.TOCUD.TO vs. XHU.TOCUD.TO vs. DGROCUD.TO vs. CYH.TOCUD.TO vs. SCHDCUD.TO vs. ^GSPCCUD.TO vs. VDY.TO
Often compared with FCUV.TO:
FCUV.TO vs. VFV.TOFCUV.TO vs. VGG.TOFCUV.TO vs. XCV.TOFCUV.TO vs. FXM.TOFCUV.TO vs. XVLU.TOFCUV.TO vs. FINN.NEOFCUV.TO vs. XSP.TO

Return for Risk

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CUD.TO
CUD.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
CUD.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CUD.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
CUD.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
CUD.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
CUD.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank
FCUV.TO
FCUV.TO Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
FCUV.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCUV.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCUV.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
FCUV.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCUV.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CUD.TO) and Fidelity U.S. Value ETF (FCUV.TO). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

CUD.TOFCUV.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.40
2.46

-2.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.64
3.33

-2.69

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.08

1.44

-0.36

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.64

5.18

-4.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.57

18.28

-16.72

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CUD.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.40, which is lower than the FCUV.TO Sharpe Ratio of 2.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CUD.TO and FCUV.TO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CUD.TOFCUV.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.40

2.46

-2.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.12

1.45

-1.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.35

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.60

1.55

-0.95

Drawdowns

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CUD.TO drawdown since its inception was -38.36%, which is greater than FCUV.TO's maximum drawdown of -16.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CUD.TO and FCUV.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CUD.TOFCUV.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.36%

-16.47%

-21.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.34%

-6.70%

-0.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.28%

-16.47%

+1.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.06%

-16.47%

-1.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.36%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.84%

-1.17%

-3.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.09%

-2.52%

-1.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.00%

1.90%

+1.10%

Volatility

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (CUD.TO) is 2.69%, while Fidelity U.S. Value ETF (FCUV.TO) has a volatility of 5.31%. This indicates that CUD.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCUV.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CUD.TOFCUV.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.69%

5.31%

-2.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.82%

10.95%

-2.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.74%

14.13%

-2.39%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.67%

15.14%

-0.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.20%

14.72%

+2.48%

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

CUD.TO has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than FCUV.TO's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

CUD.TO vs. FCUV.TO - Dividend Comparison

CUD.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, more than FCUV.TO's 0.91% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CUD.TO
iShares US Dividend Growers Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		1.92%1.99%1.76%1.96%1.84%1.98%2.05%1.65%2.05%1.44%1.76%1.72%
FCUV.TO
Fidelity U.S. Value ETF		0.91%1.13%1.03%1.42%2.71%1.40%1.14%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

CUD.TO and FCUV.TO have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, FCUV.TO is cheaper at 0.38% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FCUV.TO is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for CUD.TO.

CUD.TO tracks S&P High Yield Dividend Aristocrats CAD Hedged Index, while FCUV.TO tracks Fidelity Canada U.S. Value Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for CUD.TO and 0.38% for FCUV.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CUD.TO and FCUV.TO

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer